Steve Austin heel turn in 2000?

[Mr.Fortuna]

I've always seemed to wonder what would have happened if Austin didn't need neck surgery back in 1999. From what I can remember during this time The Rock was starting to become as popular or more so as Steve Austin. I can also remember that during this time Austin's character had started to become stale and was in need of a change.

Now I think I remembered hearing that Austin was planning a heel turn and a subsequent Championship rematch at Wrestlemania 2000 had he not have gotten hurt. Is this true? I think it would have been an amazing rematch with The Rock winning the championship at Mania in 2000.

What do you guys think? Does anybody remember what the plan for Austin would have been?

 

[The Fabulous Rougeau's]

I highly doubt that there were long term plans for Austin in 99. It's not like he did something in the fall of 99 that required him to take the time off and have the procedure he did. Rather, it was the lingering effects of the Owen piledriver from SummerSlam 97 and the rush job rehab he did that ultimately caught up to him.

Without knowing this as a fact, I am fairly confident Austin was probably complaining of continued neck pain all throughout 99 and the WWE probably had him gut it out as long as he could before going through with the procedure. With that in mind I would think there were no long term plans for Austin in 99 because it was probably known months before he took the time off that it was going to happen.

 

[stonecoldhell]

Austin had an inury but there was no plan at all for him turning heel at 2000.

Austin was owning The Rock, Taker, everyime they ever fought and was consider number 1.

Both Rock and Undertaker were bitching backstage, especially when Austin left the first time it was mostly Undertaker crying and bitching.

Then at 2002 when Austin left it was Rock crying and bitching.

Austin heel turn took WWE to new heights and proved he was the star, I'm not lying as you people say because the facts are out there.

 

[Pedigree1]

As some have already pointed out,Ausin turning heel in 99,00 was not on the table.. He was suffering from that botched piledriver Owen Hart gave him at Summerslam 97. He gutted it out as long as possible and i sure WWE told him to hang in there as long as possible.

The Rock true enough was becoming a huge star but i doubt turning Austin Heel would have made much of a difference..

 

[Kyphael]

Backstage politics and neck problems aside, in an alternate universe, would have been interesting. Austin's heel turn was sort of overshadowed by The Invasion I felt, in 2001. While 2000 was a great year for the WWE, an added heel Austin would have made it even better, if you make it a two man power trip even. It's not like the main event of Wrestlemania 2000 was a classic, so this would have been a major improvement.

 

[Stone Cold Tea]

Austin had an inury but there was no plan at all for him turning heel at 2000.

Austin was owning The Rock, Taker, everyime they ever fought and was consider number 1.

Both Rock and Undertaker were bitching backstage, especially when Austin left the first time it was mostly Undertaker crying and bitching.

Then at 2002 when Austin left it was Rock crying and bitching.

Austin heel turn took WWE to new heights and proved he was the star, I'm not lying as you people say because the facts are out there.

Oh great your back There's no denying Austin was top guy before he left for surgery. Why would The Rock be bitching when Austin left in 99? This allowed The Rock to cement his position as number 1.

'Taker had left himself around the same time Austin did for surgery so what did he have to bitch about?

Everyone had a right to bitch when Austin left in 2002 as he did it the wrong way.

As for Austins turn taking WWF to new heights behave yourself. Austins stock diminished with that turn and the numbers dropped


On to OP I think a heel turn would have been interesting but it would have to happen after 'Mania or I don't think HHH would have had the great year he did. Also 'Mania 2000 was too soon for another Austin Rock main event imo.

 

[Goldie]

The fans didn't want to boo Austin when he turned heel at WM17, how long did the heel turn last, 6 months? before he turned face again.

Bringing it forward a year (on the assumption that Austin was capable of working a schedule here) wouldn't have made too much difference.
When Hogan turned heel in 1996.... a section of fans were booing him anyway, tired of his long standing 'babyface in the white hat' routine.
Austin was still red hot as a babyface... and the fans did not want to boo him.
They would want him back babyface and find other ways for Austin to tweak his character.

Rock had a phenomenal year in 2000, and business still ticked away nicely without Austin. However Austin still edged it slightly as to who was the biggest star in the company.

There was no reason for Taker to bitch as both Rock/Austin were light years ahead of him in terms of star power. I would even put Mick Foley ahead of Taker from that Attitude era popularity.

 

[WhiplashUnited]

Not in 1999/2000. He was hotter than ever. Just had to get the surgery to get past the Owen pile driver.

If HHH didnt get injured in May 2001 I think both he and Austin could've had at least a year of being a successful heel team culminating in a Wrestlemania X8 main event. This probably would've killed the invasion angle and had the WCW guys introduced as challengers similar to the way to Jericho came on to the scene by interrupting The Rock.

 

[SuperTaco]

As some have already pointed out,Ausin turning heel in 99,00 was not on the table.. He was suffering from that botched piledriver Owen Hart gave him at Summerslam 97. He gutted it out as long as possible and i sure WWE told him to hang in there as long as possible.

The Rock true enough was becoming a huge star but i doubt turning Austin Heel would have made much of a difference..

Your username should be Yeahwhathesaid or everyopinion, because all you do is copy paste other peoples' thoughts and reword them slightly. If you had a job you'd be the ultimate yes man.

But, you know, as a few of the others have already stated, Austin was not turning heel in 99/00. He was still feeling the ill effects from that botched piledriver from Owen Hart. I bet he tried to tough it out as long as he could.

See what I just did there?

 

[MrTDG]

I just don't see it happening for the aforementioned reasons. The Austin heel turn went too much against the grain. However, I may be in the minority in that I actually enjoyed his work during that time period. He was hilarious. With that said, there is no denying that the turn itself did not work. It's like the Road Warriors heel turn in 1988. It didn't help that it took place in Texas. Although WrestleMania crowds are international, there are still a large percentage of local fans in the audience.

On another note, it's hard to even picture Austin in the picture during 2000. There was so much that the WWF did right then and I feel they didn't miss a beat. I was personally more entertained by Raw and the PPVs in 2000 than I was in 1999 as well. With Austin in the picture, someone misses out on an opportunity.

 

[Just Do It]

What went down at WM17 was meant to happen a year earlier. Not being in Texas, it would have been interesting to see how the crowd reacted. But as with 2001, Austin didn't exactly have a lot of good babyfaces to go up against in 2000. Foley would have been gone. Undertaker wasn't around at WM16 and wouldn't be for a few months. Kane is Kane. Jericho didn't mesh well with Austin when they did eventually go at it in 2001 (and Benoit was heel at this point so he couldn't get into the fold).

 

[SCrooked1]

The fans didn't want to boo Austin when he turned heel at WM17, how long did the heel turn last, 6 months? before he turned face again.

Bringing it forward a year (on the assumption that Austin was capable of working a schedule here) wouldn't have made too much difference.
When Hogan turned heel in 1996.... a section of fans were booing him anyway, tired of his long standing 'babyface in the white hat' routine.
Austin was still red hot as a babyface... and the fans did not want to boo him.
They would want him back babyface and find other ways for Austin to tweak his character.

Rock had a phenomenal year in 2000, and business still ticked away nicely without Austin. However Austin still edged it slightly as to who was the biggest star in the company.

There was no reason for Taker to bitch as both Rock/Austin were light years ahead of him in terms of star power. I would even put Mick Foley ahead of Taker from that Attitude era popularity.

Austin had only been back for 6 months when he turned in 2001. He was red hot during the McMahon rivalry, judging by the reactions he was getting during the Survivor Series '99 buildup I don't consider that "red hot". His entire face run in 1998-mid 99 run was based on Vince keeping the World Title away from him, what was he gonna do as a face in 2000 w/o playing off Vince like in 1998-99? It was obvious he was going heel, why do you think they turned him just 6 months after he returned? They had one more big storyline for him as a face (who ran him down) and then after that felt there was nothing else left for him to do as a face. The only way he could've remained face after X7 was winning the match clean but he had already won the first matchup at XV clean so that wasn't happening again.